Law Commons^™

Don't Be So Quick To Ban Violent Videogames, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Hate Funeral Protests? Then Ignore Them, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Patriotism For Profit And Persuasion: The Trademark, Free Speech, And Governance Problems With Protection Of Governmental Marks In The United States, Malla Pollack

Malla Pollack

“Governmental marks” are words or phrases which involve the identity of a social group that is partly defined in terms of its citizenship in a government-institution. The power to name a social group (especially one from which exit is difficult) confers enormous power over the group’s members. Legally classifying such words as trademarks commodifies them, increasing the namer’s power: both by giving the word monetary value and by providing the mark-holder with the legal right to prevent others from manipulating the word’s meaning.

Destination marketing employing governmental marks has become ubiquitous. The municipal governments of both New York City and …

The Puzzle Of Brandeis, Privacy, And Speech, Neil M. Richards

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Right to Privacy' and his dissent in Olmstead v. United States. In The Right to Privacy, Brandeis and Samuel Warren argued that intrusion into and public disclosure of private affairs by the press was deeply hurtful, and that the common law should be read to recognize a tort remedy for such violations. Their short article is considered by scholars to have established not just the privacy torts but the field of privacy law itself. Brandeis is also famous (though less so) for his Olmstead dissent-a document which introduced modern concepts of privacy into constitutional law, and ultimately led not …

Sticks And Stones May Break Your Bones ... But Words May Break The Bank: Monetary Damages For 'True Threats' And The Future Of Free Speech After Planned Parenthood Of The Columbia/Willamette V. American Coalition Of Life Activists, Randall D. Nicholson

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Note is divided into five parts. Part I introduces the plaintiffs and defendants in Planned Parenthood and provides a detailed description of the content of the posters as well as the other evidence used to find the defendants liable for threatening speech. Part II presents a brief description of the details of, and impetus for, the enactment of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act ("FACE"), as the act provides the basis for liability. To highlight that the majority's position in Planned Parenthood did not comport with current First Amendment jurisprudence, Part III analyzes the major decisions handed …

Draft Of Beck Lecture - 2010, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

I am grateful to the wonderful BU community that has taught me so much, and to those who made this event possible. I thank Dean O'Rourke for hosting this wonderful event, Mary Gallagher, Cornell Stinson and Erin Elwood for organizing it, and I thank you all for coming. I am honored to follow Bill Ryckman in the Chair, a man I admire. Most especially I thank Phil Beck for his generosity to the Boston University School of Law in funding this Chair. It's flattering to me having been chosen its recipient, and flattering to the school that Phil chose us …

Draft Of Beck Speech - 2010, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

I come here with a sense of gratitude, to the intellectually stimulating BU community of students, staff and faculty, that has taught me so much, and grateful today especially to those who made this event possible. I would like to thank you all for coming, thank Dean O'Rourke for hosting this wonderful event, Mary Gallagher and Cornell Stinson for organizing it, and most especially I thank Phil Beck for his generosity to the Boston University School of Law in funding this Chair. It's immensely flattering to me having been chosen the initial recipient, and flattering to the school that Phil …

Rights Bring Responsibility: Clear Constitutional Protections May Be Only The Beginning Of The Discussion, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Neoformalism And The Reemergence Of The Rights/Privilege Distinction In Public Employment Law, Paul Secunda

Paul M. Secunda

The First Amendment speech rights of public employees, which have traditionally enjoyed protection under the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, have suddenly diminished in recent years. At one time developed to shut the door on the infamous privilege/rights distinction, the unconstitutional conditions doctrine has now been increasingly used to rob these employees of their constitutional rights.

Three interrelated developments explain this state of affairs. First, a jurisprudential school of thought – the “subsidy school” – has significantly undermined the vitality of the unconstitutional conditions doctrine through its largely successful sparring with an alternative school of thought, the “penalty school.” Second, although …

Property's End: Why Competition Policy Should Limit The Right Of Publicity, Steven Semeraro

Steven Semeraro

The right of publicity is an intellectual property right that empowers celebrities to prohibit the unauthorized use of their names, images, and identities. Over the past two decades, academic commentators have presented powerful critiques of this right. Yet, legislatures and courts have turned a deaf ear, continuing to expand publicity rights. This article has two goals. First, it explains why the seemingly persuasive critique of the right of publicity has failed to influence law makers. The right’s critics claim that publicity cannot be property because the arguments used to justify actual property simply do not apply to publicity. When one …

Excuse Me, Sir, Can You Spare Some Certiorari? Why Downtown “No Panhandling” Zones Are Constitutionally Suspect, Noah J. Kores

Noah J Kores

Panhandlers are becoming increasingly prevalent in urban areas across the United States. Many cities have taken action to regulate where, when, and how panhandling may be performed. One particular trend raises many First Amendment questions: downtown panhandling bans. As panhandling is a form of free speech, the question is whether downtown bans go too far.

Under the First Amendment, many downtown bans fail both intermediate and strict scrutiny. Specifically, St. Petersburg, Florida’s ordinance fails because it places content-based restrictions on speech -- meaning it restricts speech based on what an individual is attempting to say. Panhandling bans are content-based because …

Associational Speech, Ashutosh Bhagwat

Ashutosh Bhagwat

This article explores the relationship between the First Amendment right of free speech and the nontextual First Amendment right of freedom of association. In Part I, I explore the doctrinal roots of the right of association, and also review recent scholarship regarding the association right, as well as the provisions of the First Amendment addressing public assembly and petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. Drawing on these materials, I demonstrate that historically, the assembly, petition, and association rights were important, independent rights of co-equal status to the free speech and press rights of the First Amendment, and therefore …

Best Intentions: Reconsidering Best Practices Statements In The Context Of Fair Use And Copyright Law, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

Private ordering is increasingly playing a role in determining the scope of intellectual property rights both as a de facto and a de jure matter. In this essay, I consider the best practices movement and its efforts to use private ordering to limit the scope and enforcement of copyright law. Best practices statements in the copyright context establish voluntary guidelines for what should be deemed fair uses of others’ copyrighted works. I identify some of the de facto successes of the best practices movement, but also raise a number of concerns about the project. As I have discussed elsewhere, the …

Remembering Ed Baker, Tobias Barrington Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

This is a short biographical piece honoring and describing deceased colleague C. Edwin Baker.

False And Misleading Campaign Speech And The Need For Reform, Kirsten L. Wilcox

Kirsten L Wilcox

This article examines the prevalence of false and misleading speech in political campaigns and the role of the media in proliferating this false speech. Four examples of false speech from the 2008 presidential campaign are considered, as well as the effects of that speech. The media contributes to the problem of false speech when it fails to correct false statements and repeats misleading claims. Several solutions are proposed for decreasing the amount of false or misleading speech in campaigns, including better fact checking, public service announcements, coverage restrictions and a ratings system.

Liberating Copyright: Thinking Beyond Free Speech, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

Scholars have often turned to the First Amendment to limit the scope of ever-expanding copyright law. This approach has mostly failed to convince courts that independent review is merited and has offered little to individuals engaged in personal rather than political or cultural expression. In this Article, I consider the value of an alternative paradigm using the lens of substantive due process and liberty to evaluate users’ rights. A liberty-based approach uses this other developed body of constitutional law to demarcate justifiable personal, identity-based uses of copyrighted works. Uses that are essential for mental integrity, intimacy promotion, communication, or religious …

Astrachan And Easton: Fight Wikileaks Case In Court, Not In Cyberspace, James B. Astrachan, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Religious Argument, Free Speech Theory, And Democratic Dynamism, Gregory P. Magarian

Gregory P. Magarian

Political theorists have long debated whether liberal democratic norms of public political debate should constrain political arguments grounded in religious beliefs or similar conscientious commitments. In this Article, Professor Magarian contends that normative insights from free speech theory have salience for this controversy and should ultimately lead us to reject any normative constraint on religious argument. On the restrictive side of the debate stand prominent liberal theorists, led by John Rawls, who maintain that arguments grounded in religion and other comprehensive commitments threaten liberal democracy by offering illegitimate grounds for government action and destabilizing democratic politics. On the permissive side …

What The Abortion Disclosure Cases Say About The Constitutionality Of Persuasive Government Speech On Product Labels, Leslie Gielow Jacobs

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Enforcing The Bill Of Rights Against The States: The History And The Future, Richard Aynes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This article traces, in broad strokes, the history of the disputes about whether or not the Bill of Rights can be enforced against the states.

It begins with pre-Fourteenth Amendment claims and recounts the actions of the 39th Congress: The Freedman’s Bureau, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and the Fourteenth Amendment. Several speeches on the Amendment from the Congressional elections of 1866 are utilized, including those of Section 1 author John Bingham, Congressmen Columbus Delano, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Wilson, James Garfield, and Senator John Sherman, as well as Democrats who participated in what has been termed the most …

Sexting And Teenagers: Omg R U Going 2 Jail???, Catherine Arcabascio

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Defaming Muhammad: Dignity, Harm, And Incitement To Religious Hatred, Peter G. Danchin

Faculty Scholarship

The Danish cartoons controversy has generated a torrent of commentary seeking to define and defend competing conceptions of the normative implications of the affair. This Article addresses the question of how liberal democratic states ought to respond to visible manifestations of hatred, especially speech that constitutes incitement to religious hatred. Taking the publication of the Danish cartoons as its point of departure, the Article interrogates the complex historical and normative relationship between free speech and freedom of religion in the liberal democratic order and discusses the two critical questions of whether the cartoons give rise to a genuine conflict of …

Cyberspace Property Rights: Private Property Interests In The Context Of Internet Webpages, Taylor E. White

Proxy

No abstract provided.

First Amendment Martyr, First Amendment Opportunist: Commentary On Larry Flynt's Role In The Free Speech Debate, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Enforcing The Bill Of Rights Against The States: The History And The Future, Richard Aynes

Richard L. Aynes

This article traces, in broad strokes, the history of the disputes about whether or not the Bill of Rights can be enforced against the states. It begins with pre-Fourteenth Amendment claims and recounts the actions of the 39th Congress: The Freedman’s Bureau, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and the Fourteenth Amendment. Several speeches on the Amendment from the Congressional elections of 1866 are utilized, including those of Section 1 author John Bingham, Congressmen Columbus Delano, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Wilson, James Garfield, and Senator John Sherman, as well as Democrats who participated in what has been termed the most …

Finding A Voice: Using The Internet For Free Speech And Expression In Iran, Chelsea Zimmerman

Human Rights & Human Welfare

In July 2009, many Iranians took to the streets to protest the results of the presidential election in which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won with a reported 62% of the vote. The protests, stemming from allegations of electoral fraud, quickly exposed the government's limited tolerance for dissent. In addition to street demonstrations, protestors utilized social networking websites to express their opposition to the election results. The world, following Internet feeds, witnessed the restrictive mechanisms Iran’s government placed on expression and speech. People throughout the world admonished Iran for the government's interference with cell phone and Internet networks. Iran’s free speech and expression …

The Government-Speech Doctrine: “Recently Minted,” But Counterfeit, Steven H. Goldberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The foci of this Article are the ill-advised creation of a government-speech doctrine in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 129 S. Ct. 1125 (2009), and its potential for substantial First Amendment mischief particularly with respect to the establishment of religion. Created out of whole cloth, with no regard for precedent, and in a case that did not even raise the issue of government speech, the doctrine permits the government to speak with viewpoint about controversial cultural issues upon which the government has no constitutional right to act. Asked to find unconstitutional the refusal of a municipality to allow a Summum …

When Statutory Regimes Collide:Will Wisconsin Right To Life And Citizens United Invalidate Federal Tax Regulation Of Campaign Activity?, Miriam Galston

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

In Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life (2007) and Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010), the United States Supreme Court dramatically reduced the ability of Congress to regulate campaign finance activities of corporations and others active in elections. Many of the same activities are still subject to restrictions by the Internal Revenue Code, which regulates the type and amount of political campaign activities that certain nonprofits exempt under federal tax law can engage in.

In the wake of the campaign finance decisions, the constitutionality of the tax law’s restrictions on campaign activity is now being challenged in …

Speech Platforms Law Review Symposium 2010: Government Speech: The Government's Ability To Compel And Restrict Speech, Abner S. Greene

Faculty Scholarship

The state plays different roles, and free speech doctrine should (and sometimes does) respect these roles. We properly insist (with some categorical exceptions) that the state not regulate private speech based on subject matter or point of view. If private speakers want to praise the Nazis or condemn homosexuality, the state has no place stopping them, even if firmly convinced these ideas are wrong. Why we have such firm protection for speech we abhor is a matter of much debate. To some extent, it's because we don't trust the state to make content-based judgments consistently as a matter of principle; …

Educating The United States Supreme Court At Summers' School: A Lesson On The "Special Character Of The Animal", Rafael Gely, Ramona L. Paetzold, Leonard Bierman

Faculty Publications

In this article, we explore the implications that Professor Summers' insights regarding public employment have for the Garcetti and Davenport decisions. In particular, we focus on the extent to which the political nature of public employment affects public employees' rights to freedom of speech as well as matters regarding the representational functions of public employee unions.